The Principle of Universal Love
Rolf A. F. Witzsche
Are
we coming of age?
Can we say to
one-another
I have seen thy face as though I have seen the face of God?
Boundary
Zone to Extinction
A step beyond
genocide into today's dying world of increasing insanity
in which nuclear war seem rather 'small.'
Universal
Love versus Sexual and Political Isolation
We should never ask
if war can be avoided. Instead we should ask ourselves: What are we doing individually and collectively to
prevent a new war, even nuclear war? Another
equally valid question would be: Are
the resulting efforts sufficient?
In
building a world without war, poverty, violence, and terror, how
far have progressed? What is LaRouche's role in that, and the role
of Mary Baker Eddy?
For a time, a
workable plan had been put forward in the US by the
internationally respected economist and statesman Lyndon H.
LaRouche Jr. I have summarized his proposal that briefly became US
policy until Mr. LaRouche was persecuted, nearly assassinated
repeatedly, and then jailed in an judicial abuse that the former
US Attorney General Ramsey Clark described is essence as the worst
judicial misconduct and abuse of federal power known to him.
For more details
see:
Meet
the man who may have saved your life, and may do it again.
LaRouche's
comments on his persecution related to preventing nuclear war.
Ultimately it will
be acknowledged, as it has been recognized already a long time
ago, that Love is a universal
principle. Sure, we are willing to concede that hate and fascism are not love.
But
what about indifference and self-isolation, or the isolation of
another by all the countless causes in the world? Indifference is a subtle form of hate, is it not? It
certainly isn't love. Indeed, indifference has the same effect than hate, because it
allows hate to unfold unopposed, and thus claim itself some power to rule. The
result of society's indifference has been devastating for it and
destructive to its civilization. We should ask ourselves if this was necessary. Did it have to happen? Could the
devastation have been prevented? Of course it could have been
prevented. It could have been prevented by accepting the
principle of universal love. (See: The
Case for Universal Love)
Am I pushing this
line of thinking too far? I don't think so.
World War I could have been avoided. There had not been a need for
it in any shape of form. But
it wasn't avoided. A bunch of fools created that war who were not
stopped by society, and
Europe was destroyed as consequence with a loss of many tens of
millions of lives. The human loss that the world suffered will never be regained.
Word War II
likewise, could have been avoided, but it wasn't. The foolish
people who wanted that war, again, were not stopped. This
pattern will be repeated with ever greater consequences until the
cycle can be broken when we begin to develop the real dimension of our humanity.
With this unfolds the principle of universal love. We face a great
task in this regard, that has been avoided for centuries.
However, if society had dealt with its indifference
in earlier times in the light of the principle of universal love, the problem of nuclear war wouldn't exist today.
And still, in spite of the now impending greater tragedy that we
all face, the indifference remains that allows the course towards
nuclear war to continue.
The potential for
the unleashing of a nuclear war is great, and the few people who
recognize this fact tend to point their fingers at governments,
rather than at themselves. And so the problem remains
what it was from the beginning, a symptom of the disease
of indifference and ignorance, that merely has become acute. Hopefully, as we come to
recognize this trend, we begin to develop our potential to snap out of
this trend and to live up to our name as human beings, and value our humanity.
When this begins to happen the
principle of universal love will become a natural component of
our relationships to one another, and our survival will be
assured.
This is what it
means to seek the solution to our world's problem on a platform
that rests on a higher level of thinking than that on which the
problem is defined. We cannot fight wars on the same platform on
which wars are created, and hope to win. We will fail, as indeed
we have failed for centuries. We can only hope to win if we step
up to a higher level platform in acknowledgement of the Principle
of the universe in which the principle of universal love is
rooted.
Nevertheless, I
agree, the principle of universal love is seen by most people as a
hopeless proposition. I have spent twenty years exploring the
immensity of that challenge. The exploration resulted in creating
a series of eight novels, The
Lodging for the Rose (completely
free online). Yes, the challenge that the
principle of universal love poses, is great. But let me ask this:
In comparison to society's submission to the ever increasing
certainty of a nuclear world war with the resulting annihilation
of humanity, shouldn't the promise of the principle of universal
love be rather appealing and worthy the efforts that may be
required to embrace it?
For this transition
to sanity to become possible we may need to rally around,
and support the efforts, of the most advanced pioneers of this age
- the brightest thinkers who represent the greatest intellectual
tradition that has been developed throughout mankind's long history.
Unfortunately, we find not many today, who fit this category.
Fortunately, however, those few, with Lyndon LaRouche standing at
the forefront, also have the qualification to provide the
leadership required to save the present society from the folly of
its mad rush towards its assured self-destruction.
All-In-One
Christian Science
a major research site by Rolf Witzsche
The
Road to World Peace
Rolf
Witzsche - Home Page
